We all negotiate on a daily basis. On a personal level, we negotiate with friends, family, landlords, car sellers and employers, among others. Negotiation is also the key to business success. No business can survive without profitable contracts. Within a company, negotiation skills can lead to your career advancement.
I hope that you will join the hundreds of thousands of learners who have made “Successful Negotiation” one of the most popular and highly-rated MOOCs worldwide. In the course, you’ll learn about and practice the four steps to a successful negotiation:
(1) Prepare: Plan Your Negotiation Strategy
(2) Negotiate: Use Key Tactics for Success
(3) Close: Create a Contract
(4) Perform and Evaluate: The End Game
To successfully complete this course and improve your ability to negotiate, you’ll need to do the following:
(1) Watch the short videos (ranging from 5 to 20 minutes). The videos are interactive and they include questions to test your understanding of negotiation strategy and skills. You can speed up or slow down videos to match your preferred pace for listening. Depending on your schedule, you can watch the videos over a few weeks or you can binge watch them. A learner who binge-watched the course concluded that “It’s as good as Breaking Bad.” Another learner compared the course to “House of Cards.” Both shows contain interesting examples of complex negotiations!
(2) Test your negotiation skills by completing the negotiation in Module 6. You can negotiate with a local friend or use Discussions to find a partner from another part of the world. Your negotiation partner will give you feedback on your negotiation skills. To assist you with your negotiations, I have developed several free negotiating planning tools that are related to the course. These tools and a free app are available at http://negotiationplanner.com/
(3) Take the final exam. To successfully complete the course, you must answer 80% of the questions correctly. The exam is a Mastery Exam, which means that you can take it as many times as you want until you master the material.
Course Certificate
You have the option of earning a Course Certificate. A Certificate provides formal recognition of your achievements in the course and includes the University of Michigan logo. Learn more about Certificates at: https://learner.coursera.help/hc/en-us/articles/209819053-Get-a-Course-Certificate
This course is also available in Spanish and Portuguese. To join the fully translated Spanish version, visit this page: https://www.coursera.org/learn/negociacion/
To join the fully translated Portuguese version, visit this page: https://www.coursera.org/learn/negociacao
Subtitles for the videos are available in English, Ukrainian, Chinese (Simplified), Portuguese (Brazilian), Spanish
Created by: University of Michigan
The course logo composite is shared with a Creative Commons CC BY-SA (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/) license, and was created using images provided courtesy of Flazingo Photos (http://bit.ly/1zOylRm) and K2 Space (https://www.flickr.com/photos/k2space/14257556613/in/set-72157644732478432).

KG

I had a great time attending this course. Its like a long journey which you don't want to come to an end. Dr. George Sidel and his great efforts behind creating this course should sure be applauded.

SS

Jun 19, 2019

Filled StarFilled StarFilled StarFilled StarFilled Star

I learned so much from this online course. I never knew how many different strategies there was to negotiating until now. This course is definitely worth the time and effort to learn these skills.

レッスンから

Negotiate: Use Key Tactics for Success

This module focuses on two especially important topics: (1) how to use power during negotiations and (2) psychological tools that you can use during negotiations. Keep a paper and pencil handy, as you'll be participating in several experiments as watch these videos!

講師

George Siedel

Williamson Family Professor of Business Administration and Thurnau Professor of Business Law

字幕

Our next psychological tool relates to a concept called anchoring, which basically means that you and I anchor on an initial value when estimating the value of uncertain objects. Let's try an experiment. Please get your pencil and paper ready. Now, here's the experiment. Think of the last three digits of your phone number, add 400 to them. Pull out a calculator if you need one. And write down the total. So you should have a number that's the last three digits of your phone number plus 400. Attila the Hun was one of the most feared conquerors in world history. He was eventually defeated, AD. And my question to you is, was he defeated before or after the number you wrote down, assuming that number is a AD year? Was he defeated before or after that number? So write down the word before or after. So you should have two things written down. Last three digits plus 400 and the word before or the word after. And then, finally, write down the year, again during the Common Era, in which Attila the Hun was defeated. No fair Googling to get the answer. Okay, when I do this in class, this experiment in class, I end up often with results that look like this. So on the left, you have ranges for the last three digits of the phone number plus 400. And on the right, you have an average date of defeat of Attila the Hun. Now if you were a scientist looking at that data, sitting back and looking at that data. What does that data tell you? As you can see, as the phone numbers plus 400 increase, the dates of defeat of Attila the Hun also increase. In other words, the phone number influences the date that you chose for the defeat of Attila the Hun. By the way, the date of defeat was 451. See if you got it right. So, this is, this is what anchoring is all about. You can pick a completely random number. What does your phone number have to do with when Attila the Hun was defeated? Nothing, but yet we, we anchor. We latch on to that, to a number that's thrown out when we're trying to deal with an uncertain question, such as the date of defeat of Attila the Hun. And it's not just ordinary people who fall into this trap or tool. Specialists do as well. For example, I've got an experiment done with two sets of surgeons who specialize in lung disease. And so, the researcher developed the symptoms of somebody who might have lung disease and went to one group of lung doctors. And basically asked them are the chances of this person having lung disease higher or lower than, and then the researcher picked a random probability. Let's say higher or lower than 20%. And the doctors wrote down either higher or lower. And then the researcher asked the doctors to write down, what do you think the chances are of this person having lung disease. Okay. Then the researcher when to the second group of lung doctors. Same symptoms. And asked them, do you think the person having lung disease, the chances of the person having lung disease are higher or lower? And then selected another random probability. And do you think the chances are higher or lower than this probability? They wrote higher or lower. What do you think the chances are? Okay, well guess what happened? The two separate groups of lung doctors anchored on that random probability. Let's say the first random probability was 25% that the researcher throughout. The answers were close to 25% when they had to predict the chance of the person having lung disease. With the second group, let's say the random probability was 50%. Then the probability that they selected clustered around 50%. So even with specialists such as these physicians the anchoring trap is common. Now, how does this relate to negotiation? Well, one of the most important questions that you face in any negotiation is, who throws out the first price? Think about that for a second. What, what does, I don't know if you have business experience, but what, what's the conventional wisdom? Or what does your intuition tell you? If you're negotiating with me, do you want me to throw out the first price, or do you want to throw out the first price? Conventional wisdom says always let the other side throw out the first price. What does anchoring say? Well, as you might guess, anchoring says, you should throw out the first price. And try to anchor the other side to your number. If you're the seller, you're going to throw out a high price. You want to anchor the other side to that high price. So we have a conflict, and who's right? Well, I think both sides are right. I think that you should follow the conventional wisdom when you are dealing with the sale of something where the value is very uncertain. Because if you, if the other side throws out the first price, that's one way to obtain information about what the value actually is. But on the other hand, if you're selling something where you're fairly confident of the value. Then, you should throw out the first price and try to anchor the other side to your, either high price or low price. The problem is, and my students often ask me about this, this dilemma. The problem is what if both sides are pretty savvy and neither side wants to throw out the first price? You know, your first price choices are, it's either you or the other side. then, then what do you do when there's a stalemate? Well, you can try something in case of a stalemate that I'm calling an information exchange. Which is basically, neither side makes an offer or a counteroffer. But instead, you try to bring in facts that might be relevant to the value of the thing being sold. This is a strategy that's commonly used by attorneys when they are negotiating the settlement of litigation. There was a study done a number of years ago, and this was the conclusion from the study. In negotiations between lawyers, they, these negotiations might be less a series of offers and counteroffers and more a process of exchange of information. And so, by exchanging information, in this case, by talking about the value of other similar cases, neither side is throwing out an offer. But eventually, they're able to reach consensus. And, and so, if you do reach the stalemate situation where neither side is willing to throw out the first offer I suggest an information exchange. And so, that concludes our look at anchoring.